[Arm-netbook] EOMA68 / Libre RISC-V team financing

[Luca Saiu]

On 2017-12-27 at 11:37, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Luca Saiu <positron at gnu.org> wrote:
>> On 2017-12-27 at 09:59, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>>
>>> (1) is there anyone who does NOT wish to put their own money into
>>> buying bitclub shares who would like ME to sign them up, and, over the
>>> next few weeks and months, PAY their membership AND pay for their
>>> equipment.
>>
>> Me.
>
>  cool.  gnu.org email address, good enough for me.  if you sign up
> (don't pay membership), then privately email me the username you added
> i'll keep an eye on it over the next few weeks/months, and when i have
> available funds from the mining i'll pay your membership and
> progressively pay for some equipment as well.

I answered "Me" when you asked who would NOT like their funds to be
invested in bitclub.

Sorry, I will not sign up, and please do not use my name in anything
related to bitclub.

>> You may want to have a look at this:
>> http://behindmlm.com/companies/bitclub-network-review-zeek-ponzi-veterans-at-it-again/
>
>  yep... seen these, and more.  don't - personally - need to see any
> more :)  however for anyone who wishes to convince themselves that
> they shouldn't participate, they need only look at these types of
> online sites in order to be "convinced".

It's always difficult to prove a negative; what behindmlm tends to do is
pointing out red flags, and argue that a suspect operation should not be
trusted without strong positive evidences of legitimacy, even more in a
situation where scams abound.  When in doubt we should *not* believe.

>  (2) i have a friend whom i trust who put (actual) money in, i've
> known him for 10 years.  his commissions are... large.  and actually
> exist.

That is not a good way to tell whether the profit generates comes from a
legitimate source or from other investors.

Ponzi and pyramid schemes do pay, particularly to whoever got in at the
beginning -- but only until they inevitably collapse.  The collapse also
results in legal liabilities for the net winners, which may be forced to
return what they illegally gained.  The details of how clawback works
very by country, but if you are in the UK you should definitely be
concerned.

>  (3) this is quite LITERALLY the opposite of a ponzi scheme.  they are
> LITERALLY making the bitcoin that underpins the entire scheme.  this
> is a completely unique approach which is actually extremely clever.

It is not unique, and there is no hard proof that the money being
generated actually comes from mining.  In order to provide some evidence
to be used against us skeptics some scams do perform a token amount of
mining, insufficient to keep the scheme afloat but trackable to the
pool.  I am not informed enough to judge the theoretical sustainability
of collective mining, at the current difficulty, with MLM commissions on
top; some people say it's impossible.  I don't know, but know that many
programs with a similar pretense were scams and have already collapsed.
In such a situation I would require very strong evidence of legitimacy,
and this evidence is just not there.

This last point by itself is not a proof that bitclub is not a honest
operation (in actuality, we can't know), but some of the people involved
in bitclub also have a history of being involved in Ponzis, as pointed
out in the behindmlm article.

-- 
Luca Saiu
* GNU epsilon:           http://www.gnu.org/software/epsilon
* My personal home page: http://ageinghacker.net

I support everyone's freedom of mocking any opinion or belief, no
matter how deeply held, with open disrespect and the same unrelented
enthusiasm of a toddler who has just learned the word "poo".